Four years ago, I strongly criticized the campaign of then-Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) presidential candidate Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文). Then, her campaign failed. This time she has led a successful campaign, achieving a massive landslide victory in the presidential election and a clear majority in the legislature.
What is different? Tsai has become an excellent political leader. Rarely do political leaders consider their failings and work to improve themselves. Tsai has done precisely that.
First, she broadened the scope of her advisers. Many talented people, who were excluded in 2012, contributed to her campaign and provided valuable advice, which Tsai took.
Second, she originally believed she was an excellent debater and did not need to practice. Now, she practices extensively. Tsai and her advisers work tirelessly on the content of her speeches and policy proposals. She considers such things as whether her eyes flicker back and forth and even the angle of her head.
Third, she has learned to choose competent people who help her reach her goals. Thus, her appointment of Chen Chien-jen (陳建仁) as her running mate has been unanimously praised. In 2012, Tsai’s nominations for the DPP’s legislator-at-large list were widely criticized, but her list this year was accepted without criticism and even praised. The ability to select capable individuals makes me optimistic that she is able to run a competent government.
Tsai won almost twice as many votes as Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) presidential candidate Eric Chu (朱立倫).
In addition, she led the DPP to a stunning landslide victory in the legislature, making this the first legislature in which the DPP has won an absolute majority. The DPP won every seat in the six cities and counties south of the Jhuoshuei River (濁水溪), including Yunlin and Chiayi counties, Tainan, Kaohsiung and Pingtung County. It won many seats in central Taiwan and also won in the north — areas where it has lost in the past.
Even in Hualien, where Tsai lost the presidential vote, DPP Legislator Hsiao Bi-khim (蕭美琴) won the legislative seat.
In the legislative votes by party, the DPP won 44 percent of the vote, while the KMT won about one-quarter of the seats and the People First Party and the New Power Party (NPP) both won about 6 percent of the vote.
The NPP garnered an unexpected additional three seats in the district elections, with victories for legislators Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌), Freddie Lim (林昶佐) and Hung Tzu-yung (洪慈庸), the sister of Corporal Hung Chung-chiu (洪仲丘), who died in July 2013 under controversial circumstances only days from being discharged. All three legislators are likely to be articulate voices for young people.
Why has the DPP won by such a landslide and the KMT suffered such a disastrous defeat? The KMT under President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) has proved to be an ineffective government for the past eight years. The nation has not grown economically. Wages have remained stagnant and only a few of the government’s cronies have thrived. Premiers and ministers seem to have been chosen primarily for their incompetence.
In addition, the government’s reliance on China has not been properly considered. Ma used slogans such as “free trade is good” when asked questions about the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement and the proposed cross-strait service trade agreement. Ma’s infamous attempt to close down his own news conference after three questions on March 23, 2014, during the Sunflower movement, demonstrated his inability to communicate with Taiwanese.
In addition, Ma was politically ham-fisted. His attack on Legislative Speaker Wang Jin-pyng (王金平), while Wang was in Malaysia to attend his daughter’s wedding, was one such case. After that, Wang had no desire to help Ma and, as legislative speaker, he protected students from the police. A KMT official said that former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) would have sent a senior aide to talk to Wang, and showed him evidence that he had and asked: “What are we going to do about this?” Ma’s method has resulted in a cross-strait service trade agreement that still has not passed the legislature, despite a KMT majority.
The KMT’s heavy defeat in the elections is owed, in part, to its disastrous campaign, and for that, Chu must bear some of the responsibility. Why did he not run for president in the first place? As then-KMT chairman, how did he allow former KMT presidential candidate Hung Hsiu-chu (洪秀柱) to run her disastrous campaign? Chu did not manage the changing of candidates well and when replacing Hung Hsiu-chu, he created a further implosion by not sufficiently checking the qualifications of his running mate, former Council of Labor Affairs minister Jennifer Wang (王如玄). The negative words of KMT members questioned about the choice of Wang are unprintable.
Chu also made a substantial mistake with his China policy. His initially cautious policy on China became more strident after his visit to the nation last year. However, Taiwan’s electorate is becoming much more Taiwanized. The older Mainlanders, who identify as Chinese, have grown fewer in numbers, while their children and grandchildren in their 20s and 30s have grown up identifying themselves as Taiwanese.
Democracy works on the basis of votes. “Chinese” votes in Taiwan are dwindling in numbers, while Taiwanese votes are rapidly increasing. The KMT, if it is to survive as a meaningful party in Taiwan, must “Taiwanize”. However, is there anyone who can lead the KMT in a Taiwanizing direction? If the KMT chose someone like former Chiayi mayor Huang Min-hui (黃敏惠) as chairwoman, would the party follow?
If the KMT does not Taiwanize, Taiwanese are likely to toss it into the dustbin of history.
Bruce Jacobs is emeritus professor of Asian Languages and Studies at Monash University in Melbourne, Australia.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS